[MilCom] WAS KC-45 Bases; now F-117

[Declared_Hostile]

The F-22 in stealthy attack configuration can carry 2 GBU-32 JDAMs along 
with 2 AIM-120s and 2 AIM-9xs or it can carry 8 of the new 250 pound 
GBU-39/B Small Diameter Bombs along with 2 AIM-120s and 2 AIM-9xs.  If 
in the unlikely scenario in which it wanted to carry in an un-stealthy 
configuration it has 5000 pound wing hardpoints.

The F-22 has also demonstrated the ability to eject the GBUs at 
supersonic speed and at high altitude which is said to substantially 
increase the standoff range of the weapons when compared to launch from 
other platforms.

A nearly undetectable  F-22 cruising around your airspace at supersonic 
speeds, at 50,000 feet, punching out 1000 pound JADMs or SDBs is as 
lethal to the enemy as the F-117 ever was if not more so.

DH

Duane Mantick wrote:
> ANYthing that flies, for all practical purposes, can
> have a "ground attack capability". A C-130, for
> example, can kick "fuel-air" munitions out the back
> door; they're HUGE and designed originally to clear
> LZ's for choppers but were found to have, er, "other
> uses". 
>
> What I question on the F22 is what can it carry in
> it's *internal* bays vs. what the F117 could carry -
> if the F22 is to remain stealthy, the external areas
> must remain "clean" *barring* some kind of store and
> pylon that is, by itself, "stealth designed".  Anybody
> seen such a thing? I am aware of things like "stealth
> cruise missile" designs, but everything that I saw or
> had reference to was far too large to be carried by
> EITHER the F22 or F117.  More likely a carry for the
> B2.  
>
> The F117 designation was misleading, to be sure.  I
> read a story quite some years back about one theory of
> how that came about.  I'll have to look it up and see
> if I can find that one.  There was some humor in that
> someplace if I'm thinking of the right story....
>
> Duane